n I write in regard to Rowan Armor’s “American Sign Language should count for class credit” featured in the March 26 issue of The Daily Free Press (pg. 7). While Mr. Armor presents an obviously intelligent, articulate and well-researched perspective on the stand that American Sign Language should count for “class credit,” I contend that he is proverbially barking up the wrong tree. Mr. Armor argues, in contrast to what his perspective headline says, that studies of ASL should satisfy College of Arts and Sciences (and others’) requirements for foreign languages. By his own admission, ASL scholarship does count for “class credit,” in the form of his self-specified courses such as SED DE 551, among others.
Moreover, I take exception to Mr. Armor’s characterizations of CAS Associate Dean for Students Loren Samons and CAS Dean Jeffrey Henderson’s responses to his inquiries as “shamefully un-academic.” Samons, specifically, is unequivocally the most academic individual whom I know, and I am utterly sure that many others will support that notion.
His incorrect citation of Dr. Samons’ title notwithstanding (who is CAS Associate Dean for Students), Mr. Armor misstates the purpose of the CAS foreign language requirement, which addresses both actual linguistic studies and studies of other non-Anglo, hence foreign, cultures. As Samons and Henderson point out, ASL is indeed not a “foreign language,” as it derives its entire workings from the Anglo-Saxon tradition, which both spoken American-style and English-style English do.
Yes, it is evident that ASL is a notably nuanced and complex form of communication, one that should be held in highest esteem. Yet ASL does not satisfy the purpose of a foreign language requirement, which is to, for at least four hours of the week, immerse students in the traditions, differences and wonderful intricacies of foreign languages and cultures.
Mr. Armor contends that languages of Native-Americans (a group of which I am a member) is on the same plane as ASL; I beg to differ. Under no pretense do I claim that one is superior to another, yet I do claim that ASL is a wholly effective attempt to recreate American English with the hands, while Twi (a Navajo language) is entirely non-Anglo. And that’s the difference.
Yes, we should all applaud and support the cultivation of ASL, for it is a great attribute to society as a whole, but it is not an effort that’s meant to be a foreign language, but indeed one which aught become less foreign to us all.
Nathaniel Pagan
CAS ’07
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
